This paper considers the following basic question: If an (ordered) linear-probing hash table is allowed \emph{two} hash functions, instead of one, how does this change the expected insertion and query time, as a function of the load factor $1 - ε$? We prove that the \emph{greedy two-choice insertion strategy} achieves polynomially better bounds than the single choice algorithm, but that one can even do \emph{much better} by using more sophisticated non-greedy strategies. Specifically, we show that there is an insertion strategy that does not evict elements (once an element is inserted, its hash choice is fixed) and that achieves expected query time $O(\log ε^{-1})$ with expected insertion time $O(ε^{-1})$. We then further show that, if one is allowed to evict elements (i.e., to change over time which hash function a given element uses), then it is possible to achieve expected query time $O(1)$ with expected insertion time $O(ε^{-1/2})$. This final result achieves an expected query time of $O(1)$ even when the hash table is filled to $100\%$ full. Combined, the results reveal that there is a surprisingly strong ``power of two choices'' phenomenon for linear-probing hash tables, allowing for a two-choice hash table to achieve significantly better bounds than what might at first seem to be possible.

翻译：暂无翻译